I don't think so, I think they are considered part of the Sri Lankan liniage as I believe that is the line the peceptor comes from, I am not sure 100%, although it would be the line the preceptor is from not the line the witnesses are.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.John Stuart Mill

well the sri lankan theravada lineage comes from thailand so there is still a thai connection...

but as regards the idea of a theravada lineage,all monks are apart of the theravada lineage with the exception of some monks who have ghettoized themself into smaller groups they think are somehow more pure than the mainstream Theravada. you're really not going to find lineages comparable to how there are different schools of Tibetan Buddhism or zen etc. a Theravada monk is pretty much free to just go from temple to temple learning whatever is taught there whether it be a Burmese style, Thai style etc.

the problem here isnt what lineage they have been ordained into but whether or not theravada monks will recognize them as theravada nuns. some have said they are not nuns at all, others have said they are mahayana nuns, which is a misnomer as there is no such thing as a mahayana monk or nun, as there is no mahayana vinaya

สัพเพ สัตตา สุขีตา โหนตุ

the mountain may be heavy in and of itself, but if you're not trying to carry it it's not heavy to you- Ajaan Suwat

If not then the idea that a monk or nun is following a particular lineage because of who their preceptor was is probably invalid. Talking about schools of Theravada Buddhism makes more sense to me rather than lineage. I would like to think, for example that Ajahn Chah would not have condoned some monk claiming to be of his lineage, and hence somehow authoritative, just because they were ordained by a disciple who was ordained by a disciple who was ordained by a disciple who he happened to teach for a few years. On the other hand if they studied with and learnt from the teachings of Ajahn Chah and his disciples (and even more importantly practiced them), regardless of who their preceptor was, I suspect he would be happy with such a monk claiming affiliation with his school .

In my view this notion of authority coming from supposed lineage affiliation really is contrary to the word and spirit of the suttas, and I suspect this is true of the Vinaya as well but I am far less knowledgeable of the latter and am happy to be corrected.

If not then the idea that a monk or nun is following a particular lineage because of who their preceptor was is probably invalid. Talking about schools of Theravada Buddhism makes more sense to me rather than lineage. I would like to think, for example that Ajahn Chah would not have condoned some monk claiming to be of his lineage, and hence somehow authoritative, just because they were ordained by a disciple who was ordained by a disciple who was ordained by a disciple who he happened to teach for a few years. On the other hand if they studied with and learnt from the teachings of Ajahn Chah and his disciples (and even more importantly practiced them), regardless of who their preceptor was, I suspect he would be happy with such a monk claiming affiliation with his school .

In my view this notion of authority coming from supposed lineage affiliation really is contrary to the word and spirit of the suttas, and I suspect this is true of the Vinaya as well but I am far less knowledgeable of the latter and am happy to be corrected.

---The trouble is that you think you have time---
---Worry is the Interest, paid in advance, on a debt you may never owe---
---It's not what happens to you in life that is important ~ it's what you do with it ---

Interestingly, if "lineage" is defined in terms of preceptors, then among the Ajahn Chah students there isn't much. Ajahn Chah was a monk long before his brief interaction with Ajahn Mun and in fact was ordained in the Mahanikaya sect (whereas Ajahn Mun was Dhammayut). Many of the prominent Western students, including Ajahns Sumedho, Passano, Tiradhammo, and Brahm, were not ordained by Ajahn Chah.

Metta
Mike

Last edited by mikenz66 on Sat Nov 28, 2009 9:02 am, edited 1 time in total.

Lineage could mean the ordination line or the teaching line, I above was using the ordination line, as sujato and some others who have done the research in this posit the ordination doesn't necesarilly dictate which teacher you follow.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.John Stuart Mill

Manapa wrote:Lineage could mean the ordination line or the teaching line, I above was using the ordination line, as sujato and some others who have done the research in this posit the ordination doesn't necesarilly dictate which teacher you follow.

Good point. In Thailand it seems to be normal to take orders from one's preceptor for 5 years, then one is free to go one's own way, or seek other teachers. However, sometimes this can happen sooner if the preceptor doesn't take much interest in the training. So, for example, as he tells it, Ven Tiradhammo wound up with Ajahn Chah after a couple of years of having no real instruction.

Just a snippet of news ~ Ajahn Tiradhammo is stopping off at Dhammagiri, Queensland, on 13th December, leaving on the 15th for Wellington ... on the way back home from WAM. He is giving a public talk at Dhammagiri on 13th December at 6.00 p.m.

metta
Chris

---The trouble is that you think you have time---
---Worry is the Interest, paid in advance, on a debt you may never owe---
---It's not what happens to you in life that is important ~ it's what you do with it ---

Chris wrote:
Just a snippet of news ~ Ajahn Tiradhammo is stopping off at Dhammagiri, Queensland, on 13th December, leaving on the 15th for Wellington ... on the way back home from WAM. He is giving a public talk at Dhammagiri on 13th December at 6.00 p.m.

Yes, I recall he said he was going to Australia in December when he was here a few weeks ago. I'm pleased that you will get to meet him (or meet him again...).

Manapa wrote:Lineage could mean the ordination line or the teaching line, I above was using the ordination line, as sujato and some others who have done the research in this posit the ordination doesn't necesarilly dictate which teacher you follow.

Good point. In Thailand it seems to be normal to take orders from one's preceptor for 5 years, then one is free to go one's own way, or seek other teachers. However, sometimes this can happen sooner if the preceptor doesn't take much interest in the training. So, for example, as he tells it, Ven Tiradhammo wound up with Ajahn Chah after a couple of years of having no real instruction.

Metta
Mike

It isn't uncommon for teachers to send their students off to other teachers (in Burma atleast).
but ones preceptor isn't necessarily the primary teacher, or as the tibetans call them root teacher.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.John Stuart Mill